Initial thoughts

> 1. can table3 be extended to read gen01 created deferred ftables?
> 2. the same question for tableicopy and tableimix.

no idea

> 3. can the [@ N] and [@@ N] statement for function tables be added to  
> the ftgen opcode (works now just in score f-statement)?

Not easy as score reading is totally different from orchestra
reading.  With the new parser one could add @ and @@ operators
"easily" but in the old parser I would rather not

> 4. let inch accept more than one argument, for instance:
> a1, a2 inch 1, 2

this is possible I think.  Will look at it

> 5. i'd love to have a possibility to read in a line from an external  
> file and get it as a string. something like:
> Sline freads Sfile, iline and
> Sline freadks Sfile, kline
> this would be the complement to the fprints/fprintks opcode.

Not hard; is it really necessary?  What is point of [i/k]line parameter?

> 6. can the facility of optional arguments for UDOs be extended for k  
> arguments (in other words: it would be great to be able to use o/j/p  
> for k-rate arguments, too).

no idea

==John ffitch

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What happens now with your Lotus Notes apps - do you make another costly 
upgrade, or settle for being marooned without product support? Time to move
off Lotus Notes and onto the cloud with Force.com, apps are easier to build,
use, and manage than apps on traditional platforms. Sign up for the Lotus 
Notes Migration Kit to learn more. http://p.sf.net/sfu/salesforce-d2d
_______________________________________________
Csound-devel mailing list
Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

thanks for the reply and the comments -

my suggestion for something like
Sline fread(k)s Sfile, i(k)line
would allow more interchange with any kind of files. for instance, you  
have a list of filenames in a file and want to pass it to the  
scoreline opcode. or any line in a file containing any string can not  
be read in any way into csound at present, i think. this makes it  
sometimes rather unflexible to work.
the i(k)line parameter would specify the line in the file.

as to [@ N] and [@@ N], it is good to know that it can work in the new  
parser. one more reason looking forward to it ...

	joachim


Am 05.12.2010 um 15:21 schrieb john ffitch:

> Initial thoughts
>
>> 1. can table3 be extended to read gen01 created deferred ftables?
>> 2. the same question for tableicopy and tableimix.
>
> no idea
>
>> 3. can the [@ N] and [@@ N] statement for function tables be added to
>> the ftgen opcode (works now just in score f-statement)?
>
> Not easy as score reading is totally different from orchestra
> reading.  With the new parser one could add @ and @@ operators
> "easily" but in the old parser I would rather not
>
>> 4. let inch accept more than one argument, for instance:
>> a1, a2 inch 1, 2
>
> this is possible I think.  Will look at it
>
>> 5. i'd love to have a possibility to read in a line from an external
>> file and get it as a string. something like:
>> Sline freads Sfile, iline and
>> Sline freadks Sfile, kline
>> this would be the complement to the fprints/fprintks opcode.
>
> Not hard; is it really necessary?  What is point of [i/k]line  
> parameter?
>
>> 6. can the facility of optional arguments for UDOs be extended for k
>> arguments (in other words: it would be great to be able to use o/j/p
>> for k-rate arguments, too).
>
> no idea
>
> ==John ffitch
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> What happens now with your Lotus Notes apps - do you make another  
> costly
> upgrade, or settle for being marooned without product support? Time  
> to move
> off Lotus Notes and onto the cloud with Force.com, apps are easier  
> to build,
> use, and manage than apps on traditional platforms. Sign up for the  
> Lotus
> Notes Migration Kit to learn more. http://p.sf.net/sfu/salesforce-d2d
> _______________________________________________
> Csound-devel mailing list
> Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What happens now with your Lotus Notes apps - do you make another costly 
upgrade, or settle for being marooned without product support? Time to move
off Lotus Notes and onto the cloud with Force.com, apps are easier to build,
use, and manage than apps on traditional platforms. Sign up for the Lotus 
Notes Migration Kit to learn more. http://p.sf.net/sfu/salesforce-d2d
_______________________________________________
Csound-devel mailing list
Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

Well table3 would have to be modified to use floating-point indexing  
rather than integer maths/masking etc.
One way round this is to implement an alternative code that would be  
used when the table is not power of two.
So table3 continues to be the same for pow of two tables, but with non- 
pow of two it uses an alternative code.

In fact this could be the solution for the perennial question: can we  
make all opcodes that read tables
use non-pow of two tables? This way we would not sacrifice the  
possible speed gain of int code, but make
all opcodes more flexible.

Thoughts?

Victor


On 5 Dec 2010, at 14:21, john ffitch wrote:

> Initial thoughts
>
>> 1. can table3 be extended to read gen01 created deferred ftables?
>> 2. the same question for tableicopy and tableimix.
>
> no idea


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What happens now with your Lotus Notes apps - do you make another costly 
upgrade, or settle for being marooned without product support? Time to move
off Lotus Notes and onto the cloud with Force.com, apps are easier to build,
use, and manage than apps on traditional platforms. Sign up for the Lotus 
Notes Migration Kit to learn more. http://p.sf.net/sfu/salesforce-d2d
_______________________________________________
Csound-devel mailing list
Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

i agree that an alternative code or a new opcode (tabi and tab3?)  
would be the best way, and the more, if it's complicated to change the  
tablei/table3 code.

as far as i have experienced, table3 works also for nonpowof2 tables.  
i have used and tested it for instance here and didn't find any  
problems:
http://www.csounds.com/udo/displayOpcode.php?opcode_id=136

but it does definitely not work for gen01 created deferred function  
tables. so in the example above, i had to transform the gen01 via  
copying in a nonpowof2, but regular function table.

	joachim


Am 05.12.2010 um 18:40 schrieb Victor Lazzarini:

> Well table3 would have to be modified to use floating-point indexing
> rather than integer maths/masking etc.
> One way round this is to implement an alternative code that would be
> used when the table is not power of two.
> So table3 continues to be the same for pow of two tables, but with  
> non-
> pow of two it uses an alternative code.
>
> In fact this could be the solution for the perennial question: can we
> make all opcodes that read tables
> use non-pow of two tables? This way we would not sacrifice the
> possible speed gain of int code, but make
> all opcodes more flexible.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Victor
>
>
> On 5 Dec 2010, at 14:21, john ffitch wrote:
>
>> Initial thoughts
>>
>>> 1. can table3 be extended to read gen01 created deferred ftables?
>>> 2. the same question for tableicopy and tableimix.
>>
>> no idea
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> What happens now with your Lotus Notes apps - do you make another  
> costly
> upgrade, or settle for being marooned without product support? Time  
> to move
> off Lotus Notes and onto the cloud with Force.com, apps are easier  
> to build,
> use, and manage than apps on traditional platforms. Sign up for the  
> Lotus
> Notes Migration Kit to learn more. http://p.sf.net/sfu/salesforce-d2d
> _______________________________________________
> Csound-devel mailing list
> Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What happens now with your Lotus Notes apps - do you make another costly 
upgrade, or settle for being marooned without product support? Time to move
off Lotus Notes and onto the cloud with Force.com, apps are easier to build,
use, and manage than apps on traditional platforms. Sign up for the Lotus 
Notes Migration Kit to learn more. http://p.sf.net/sfu/salesforce-d2d
_______________________________________________
Csound-devel mailing list
Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

No new opcodes, I think. Best to make these more flexible.

Victor
On 5 Dec 2010, at 18:04, joachim heintz wrote:

> i agree that an alternative code or a new opcode (tabi and tab3?)
> would be the best way, and the more, if it's complicated to change the
> tablei/table3 code.
>
> as far as i have experienced, table3 works also for nonpowof2 tables.
> i have used and tested it for instance here and didn't find any
> problems:
> http://www.csounds.com/udo/displayOpcode.php?opcode_id=136
>
> but it does definitely not work for gen01 created deferred function
> tables. so in the example above, i had to transform the gen01 via
> copying in a nonpowof2, but regular function table.
>
> 	joachim
>
>
> Am 05.12.2010 um 18:40 schrieb Victor Lazzarini:
>
>> Well table3 would have to be modified to use floating-point indexing
>> rather than integer maths/masking etc.
>> One way round this is to implement an alternative code that would be
>> used when the table is not power of two.
>> So table3 continues to be the same for pow of two tables, but with
>> non-
>> pow of two it uses an alternative code.
>>
>> In fact this could be the solution for the perennial question: can we
>> make all opcodes that read tables
>> use non-pow of two tables? This way we would not sacrifice the
>> possible speed gain of int code, but make
>> all opcodes more flexible.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Victor
>>
>>
>> On 5 Dec 2010, at 14:21, john ffitch wrote:
>>
>>> Initial thoughts
>>>
>>>> 1. can table3 be extended to read gen01 created deferred ftables?
>>>> 2. the same question for tableicopy and tableimix.
>>>
>>> no idea
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> What happens now with your Lotus Notes apps - do you make another
>> costly
>> upgrade, or settle for being marooned without product support? Time
>> to move
>> off Lotus Notes and onto the cloud with Force.com, apps are easier
>> to build,
>> use, and manage than apps on traditional platforms. Sign up for the
>> Lotus
>> Notes Migration Kit to learn more. http://p.sf.net/sfu/salesforce-d2d
>> _______________________________________________
>> Csound-devel mailing list
>> Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> What happens now with your Lotus Notes apps - do you make another  
> costly
> upgrade, or settle for being marooned without product support? Time  
> to move
> off Lotus Notes and onto the cloud with Force.com, apps are easier  
> to build,
> use, and manage than apps on traditional platforms. Sign up for the  
> Lotus
> Notes Migration Kit to learn more. http://p.sf.net/sfu/salesforce-d2d
> _______________________________________________
> Csound-devel mailing list
> Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What happens now with your Lotus Notes apps - do you make another costly 
upgrade, or settle for being marooned without product support? Time to move
off Lotus Notes and onto the cloud with Force.com, apps are easier to build,
use, and manage than apps on traditional platforms. Sign up for the Lotus 
Notes Migration Kit to learn more. http://p.sf.net/sfu/salesforce-d2d
_______________________________________________
Csound-devel mailing list
Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net